Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:

login

Log in through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Journal Article

Improved Estimation Procedures for Multilevel Models with Binary Response: A Case-Study

German Rodriguez and Noreen Goldman
Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (Statistics in Society)
Vol. 164, No. 2 (2001), pp. 339-355
Published by: Wiley for the Royal Statistical Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2680556
Page Count: 17
Were these topics helpful?
See somethings inaccurate? Let us know!

Select the topics that are inaccurate.

Cancel
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Download ($29.00)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Add to My Lists
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Improved Estimation Procedures for Multilevel Models with Binary Response: A Case-Study
Preview not available

Abstract

During recent years, analysts have been relying on approximate methods of inference to estimate multilevel models for binary or count data. In an earlier study of random-intercept models for binary outcomes we used simulated data to demonstrate that one such approximation, known as marginal quasi-likelihood, leads to a substantial attenuation bias in the estimates of both fixed and random effects whenever the random effects are non- trivial. In this paper, we fit three-level random-intercept models to actual data for two binary outcomes, to assess whether refined approximation procedures, namely penalized quasi-likelihood and second-order improvements to marginal and penalized quasi-likelihood, also underestimate the underlying parameters. The extent of the bias is assessed by two standards of comparison: exact maximum likelihood estimates, based on a Gauss-Hermite numerical quadrature procedure, and a set of Bayesian estimates, obtained from Gibbs sampling with diffuse priors. We also examine the effectiveness of a parametric bootstrap procedure for reducing the bias. The results indicate that second-order penalized quasi-likelihood estimates provide a considerable improvement over the other approximations, but all the methods of approximate inference result in a substantial underestimation of the fixed and random effects when the random effects are sizable. We also find that the parametric bootstrap method can eliminate the bias but is computationally very intensive.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
[339]
    [339]
  • Thumbnail: Page 
340
    340
  • Thumbnail: Page 
341
    341
  • Thumbnail: Page 
342
    342
  • Thumbnail: Page 
343
    343
  • Thumbnail: Page 
344
    344
  • Thumbnail: Page 
345
    345
  • Thumbnail: Page 
346
    346
  • Thumbnail: Page 
347
    347
  • Thumbnail: Page 
348
    348
  • Thumbnail: Page 
349
    349
  • Thumbnail: Page 
350
    350
  • Thumbnail: Page 
351
    351
  • Thumbnail: Page 
352
    352
  • Thumbnail: Page 
353
    353
  • Thumbnail: Page 
354
    354
  • Thumbnail: Page 
355
    355